Yes, the Sonos Move does not use SonosNet, so it cannot act as a ‘man in the middle’ device for a SonosNet connection between two players. 

It sounds like you are likely going to be better off sticking with SonosNet, rather than a straightforward WiFi connection, but did I read your post correctly that you have wired a ‘bonded’ sub to your router? If so, that’s not a particularly good idea. You would likely be better off wiring either a standalone speaker, or the left speaker within a stereo pair, or perhaps a Sonos Boost to the router instead.

Then ensure to do the following …

1. Set the main routers 2.4Ghz WiFi channel to ‘fixed’ channel 1, 6 or 11 and set the channel-width to 20MHz
2. With just one wired Sonos device connected direct to your router, goto the Sonos App and do the following two things:

• Goto “Settings/System/Network” and set the SonosNet channel so that it is at least 5 channels away from your chosen router channel in Step 1 above.
• Whilst in the Network Settings in the Sonos App, reset/remove your routers WiFi credentials, as these are not required when running your system with one Sonos device wired to the router.

See if that then improves your Sonos connectivity - if not, go back and try a different Router-WiFi/SonosNet channel, but whilst using SonosNet always keep the two signals at least 5 channels apart.

Gosh, I’m glad that I saw that thing on Move (in a by-the-way in an answer to a question to Boost!) Move is off my wishlist for good.

Why isn’t a good idea to connect the Sub to the network? The reason I connected the Sub is that it is on the floor next to the cupboard where I have the router. There is a speaker close by - but two metres up on the wall, so I want to avoid a visible cable.

Thanks for tip on configuring the router. It seems that I have gotten that tip before, because I have those things set. But it is good to get a reminder.

I deleted the network from the Sonos App earlier tonight, as I saw that tip in another post.

But the problem with the bedroom is surely the distance in combination with the wall. I’m going to try a different position of the Port (which I use to feed a bluetooth transmitter), from where it is closer to the bedroom. So far the bluetooth seems to work from that position.

The sub ‘bonds’ and is designed to communicate directly back to its ‘main player’ usually over an ad-hoc 5Ghz WiFi connection, or if wired, the communication will or ‘may’ go back to the player over the LAN, but in your case you ideally want the ‘wired’ devices’ WiFi card to communicate with other players and directly to the wired router - so many experienced users here suggest not using a bonded surround, or Sub as the Sonos ‘root bridge’ for a SonosNet connection, but instead recommend using a separate primary device, like a standalone speaker/boost or the left (controlling) speaker in a stereo pair, or even use the main Home Theatre device instead.

I appreciate a sub/surround may work, but you might find you are better off using a speaker or Sonos Boost in your case… but that’s a decision for you to consider. Ensure the wired device is located away from the router too.. I would suggest a distance of 3 feet, or more, to prevent interference from the router WiFi.

Don’t forget to also set your 2.4Ghz WiFi band to a channel-width of 20MHz, as that will reduce interference aswell and likely assist.

Note also that bringing the ‘stepping stone’ connections closer together, may sometimes not assist the situation, as Sonos STP will still try to take the shortest adequate route back to the root bridge and not necessarily select what you might see as possibly being the strongest connection signal.

So, just as a quick/simple example you could have a Sonos Boost (root bridge) at one end of a corridor, a Sonos Port in the middle and a Play:1 at the other end of the corridor - and the Play:1 may not ever use the Port (middle-man) to communicate with the Boost - instead it could bypass the Port completely, as it sees its direct connection with the Boost as being adequate. So sometimes placing a Sonos device in-between others may not be the answer - sometimes moving a device further away too might actually improve the overall connection by forcing it to then communicate with the middle-man. So that’s something else you perhaps may want to consider with your own setup.

Ensure the wired device is located away from the router too.. I would suggest a distance of 3 feet, or more, to prevent interference from the router WiFi.

When you mentioned it… Some months back I moved the router to be on the left side of the cupboard, and the Sub is just on the outside. I moved the router for a completely different reason. (In the vain hope that my Galaxy Tab S5e would pick it up better. I have since bought and A7 - the S5e is notorious for its poor WiFi.) The situation in the bedroom has deteriorated the last few months, and that may be due to the router move. However, the situation has never been good. I have moved the router back to the other side of the cupboard, we’ll how that works.

I make note of your caution about the Sub, but let it remain that way for now. But I did another change: for some reason, I had let all Sonos devices on to the normal WiFi network. I’ve now deleted that network from Sonos, and booted the devices off the WiFi by removing their Mac addresses from the Mac filtering.

I also moved back the Play:1s to the bedroom, and made a quick test and it seemed to work, but I need to make a longer test, which will not be until Saturday. (I’m not playing music in the bedroom that often.)

Note also that bringing the ‘stepping stone’ connections closer together, may sometimes not assist the situation, as Sonos STP will still try to take the shortest adequate route back to the root bridge and not necessarily select what you might see as possibly being the strongest connection signal.

This kind of brings us back to the original question. If I find that the situation in the bedroom is still not satisfactory, it is better to add a Boost as a stepping stone than another player? (Instead of a Move, I could get one or two Sonos One SL to the kitchen.) That is, is the Boost a better transmitter than a regular player?

(Part of the deal here is that I have one unused Trade-up. This why the Move seemed attractive. Until I learned that it doesn’t do SonosNet.)

Thanks a lot for all your suggestions!

The more modern the Sonos device, the better the wireless adapter, that is my best guess here. So I would personally prefer a modern Sonos speaker over the Sonos Boost, unless a speaker might not be appropriate in the area where it’s to be placed. So in an unused basement, for example, I might prefer the Boost.

The only speaker not to use is the ‘Move’, as it is a ‘portable’ device and for that reason, it does not use SonosNet, otherwise as you carried it around/through the Home, it would interfere with any existing SonosNet connections… so that uses the routers WiFi signal (5Ghz or 2.4Ghz band).

Thanks again, Ken!

(Although I would be a little careful to think “modern” → Better wireless.  The Galaxy Tab S5e debacle that I mentioned is a counterexample.)

Sonos seems to be moving to better wireless cards over time, they had a few batches of ones that had early failures but most got warranty replacements from what I have seen here.

I’d have a hard time recommending a Boost over a SL as a wired component, there just isn’t enough difference in performance (that I can see with my simple testing) to make it worth not having the S1 and sound.

Maybe if you had a location where the smaller size of the Boost or the power connections mattered?

Thanks Stanley. Yeah, I’ve been thinking the same myself. It’s more fun with a speaker than a silent box. And a more expensive speaker gives me more benefit for my single Trade-up I have left. I just wanted to know if the Boost was more specialised for the purpose, but it does not seem so.